|
Feb 10, 2008 |
Kansas 100 - Baylor 90
cPSAN
"Total Impact" RatingsPSAN ratings adjusted for quality of opponent | cPSAN70
"Efficiency" RatingscPSAN ratings expressed as "per 70 possessions" | Ratings on the CourtHighest: LaceDarius Dunn
Lowest: Sasha Kaun | PLAYER | cPSAN | | Darrell Arthur | 7.39 | | Mario Chalmers | 4.63 | | Russell Robinson | 3.96 | | Sherron Collins | 1.86 | | Darnell Jackson | 1.46 | | Cole Aldrich* | 1.39 | | Rodrick Stewart* | 0.66 | | Jeremy Case | 0.00 | | Brandon Rush | -1.82 | | Sasha Kaun | -3.30 | | PLAYER | cPSAN | | L. Dunn | 7.92 | | M. Diene | 6.05 | | C. Jerrells | 5.70 | | H. Dugat | 3.31 | | K. Rogers | 0.21 | | J. Lomers | -0.55 | | A. Bruce | -0.60 | | T. Carter | -1.11 | | M. Shepherd | -2.13 | *Rating not based on enough data. | Ratings on the CourtHighest: LaceDarius Dunn
Lowest: Sasha Kaun | PLAYER | cPSAN70 | | Rodrick Stewart* | 11.43 | | Darrell Arthur | 7.78 | | Cole Aldrich* | 6.92 | | Mario Chalmers | 5.02 | | Russell Robinson | 4.44 | | Darnell Jackson | 2.83 | | Sherron Collins | 2.30 | | Jeremy Case* | 0.00 | | Brandon Rush | -2.04 | | Sasha Kaun | -6.37 | | PLAYER | cPSAN70 | | L. Dunn | 13.76 | | M. Diene | 8.76 | | C. Jerrells | 6.00 | | H. Dugat | 3.96 | | K. Rogers | 0.25 | | A. Bruce | -1.16 | | T. Carter | -1.61 | | J. Lomers | -1.75 | | M. Shepherd | -6.18 | *Rating not based on enough data. |
| Comments and ObservationsThis game was like an experiment to answer this question: "What happens if a favorite can't hit any three-pointers but shoots a great average on 2FG's and FT's, while the underdog makes 3FG's from every conceivable corner of the court?" I guess the answer is that the favorite wins with slightly less comfort than it intended in a wild shootout. Offensive and Defensive Performance
Using the outcome of the game and the adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies for each team, performance indicates (in PTS per 100 Possessions) how each team would have fared against an average team. That is, KU's offensive performance is how many points per 100 possessions KU would have scored against an average defense. This provides a standard performance we can compare across teams. | (pts per 100 poss) | Kansas | Baylor | Offensive Performance
| 132.9 | 137.5
| | Defensive Performance | 98.5
| 101.6
| Comments It's hard to believe, but KU actually had the slightly better defensive performance. It's no surprise that both teams were phenomenal on offense, with the edge going to BU given that KU's defense is considered much better. In short, both teams forgot to bring their defenses and played much better on the other end. | Four Factor Analysis(Actual statistics moved to Game Projections table below) What did the difference in this
statistic mean to each team? | Scoring Margin Advantage Gained
(does not add up to game margin because teams may capitalize better or worse than average on TO's and OREB) | | Statistic Measured | Kansas | Baylor | | eFG% | | 2.7 | | TO Rate | 10.6
| | | O-Reb% | | 1.0 | | Freethrows | FT Pct | 0.2 | | | FT Attempts | 21.8
| |
Player Performance Analysis
No time for this section because I need to work on the KU-Texas preview. I'll just mention that it's been very rare to see KU players with negative ratings this season. This game, there were two with significantly negative ratings, Kaun and Rush. . Game Projections | | Projection | Actual | Comments | OVERALL RESULTS | | Final Score | KU 87-71
| KU 100-90
| | Tempo (# poss)
| 75 | 76 | | FOUR FACTORS ADVANTAGES
| | eFG% | KU 55-47% | BU 53-51%
| Baylor seemed to be hitting anything they threw up at the beginning and end. | | TO Rate (lo better) | KU 21-17% | KU 21-10%
| Second most important advantage was created by KU's ability to hang onto the ball. | | O-Reb% | KU 36-26%
| BU 39-37%
| Horrible start in rebounding for KU as BU grabbed the first 9 boards. | | FT Rate | KU 31-25% | KU 57-19%
| You just don't see this kind of advantage for KU this season, but this was the biggest reason for victory. | Four Factors Overall
| Advantage to KU in all four factors, with the heaviest in eFG% should lead to comfortable victory. | Free throw attempts and ability to limit turnovers carried KU. The sum of factor advantages was 29, much higher than the final margin of 10 pts. This means that BU's turnovers and offensive rebounds were converted in points at a much higher rate than were KU's. | | PLAYER PROJECTIONS (10+ min played) | | Leading Scorers | KU - Arthur/Chalmers/Jackson Opp - Jerrells, Rogers | KU - Arthur, Robinson Opp - Jerrells, Dunn | | Highest cPSAN
(game impact)
| KU - Jackson Opp - Rogers | KU - Arthur (Jackson #5) Opp - Dunn (Rogers #5) |
| Highest cPSAN70
(efficiency)
| KU - Jackson Opp - Diene | KU - Arthur (Jackson #4) Opp - Dunn (Rogers #5) |
| | Highest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Kaun, Arthur Opp - Diene, Bruce | KU - Arthur, Robinson Opp - Dunn, Diene | Kaun was the biggest disappointment for KU this game, while this indicates that Dunn had to be the nicest surprise, even though he was atop the ratings in the preview. | | Lowest efficiency vs season-to-date | KU - Rush, Chalmers Opp - Carter, Dunn | KU - Kaun, Rush Opp - Shepherd, Rogers | |
Pre-Game Keys to Watch For | Keys to Watch For | Metric | Result | Edge (Comments) | | One of the biggest correlates of scoring efficiency for BU will be eFG% based on both teams' trends. Jerrells, Rogers and Dunn shoot often and could determine the eFG% of BU as a whole. | Jerrells, Rogers and Dunn to combine for at least 52 eFG% shooting
| They combined for 61 eFG%
| BAYLOR - Particularly the 3FG shooting of Dunn and Jerrells kept BU closer than expected. | | Even though KU is deep and athletic, the season trends show that KU's offensive efficiency suffers when the pace increases. Meanwhile, BU's defense improves. A high tempo could favor BU to some extent. | Game tempo 76 possessions or higher per team | Tempo was 81 possessions
| BAYLOR - There is no quantitative way to prove this was an advantage to BU, but the overall season stats would argue that they should have been. The closer-than-expected results suport this. | | FT Rate is a significant indicator for KU's offense and defense. On offense, KU's best FT Rate players are Chalmers, Robinson, Jackson. For Baylor, it's Jerrells and Diene. | Chalmers, Jackson, Robinson to combine for at least 12 FTA. Jerrells and Diene to be held to fewer than 8 FTA. | The KU trio combined for 23 FTA. The BU duo had 7.
| KANSAS - The number one reason KU won was the advantage at the FT line. |
|
|
